Is This Really The Future You Want?

[u/Kamsimation]

This is what happens when there's no regulation

[u/softhi]

I think game dev will adapt.

Moving forward, we'll probably see a shift where studios build a community before they even build the game.

The relationship between devs and their community is going to be the key to a game's success. Taking feedback seriously, staying responsive, clearly communicating the reasoning behind design decisions, and making players feel like they're growing alongside the game. That’s going to become the new norm.

That kind of relationship will not be possible to replace with a vibe code game/app.

[u/ManagerSecure6012 → u/softhi]

nah, we’ll see a shift where no one will post anything. No trailers before release. No demos. Marketing will be done after release.

[u/softhi → u/ManagerSecure6012]

Don't think that will work unless it is a already existing popular IP.

Also, it is still easy to copy

[u/ManagerSecure6012 → u/softhi]

It’s the only way forward for indie devs if this continues. Still easy to copy sure but at least their game will be out and available to purchase. Turning it into actual competition based on quality rather than who’s first.

[u/No-Revolution6743 → u/softhi]

How do you build a community without a thing to build that community around, exactly?

[u/softhi → u/No-Revolution6743]

I can give you some examples of how modern developers do this.

Many start by setting up a landing page or wishlist that keeps the exact details of the game or platform pretty vague, while inviting people to join a beta-testing Discord or community.

From there, the founder actively recruits a specific target audience. Usually people with a distinct pain point they need solved, or a niche interest that no other game on the market currently scratches. The developer then listens closely to these core users and builds the project directly around their feedback and needs.

Because those early players usually have friends who share the same niche interests or problems, they start inviting them in, and the community grows organically. It’s often a slow process, but those early adopters end up being the loyal players who stick with the product for years.

[u/No-Revolution6743 → u/softhi]

I wouldn’t use the word examples, you’ve just described a single process in multiple steps. Which is useful, but does not at all answer my question because your process both contains a product that the community is oriented around and is immediately susceptible to the same issue being discussed. If anything I think this is parallel development

[u/softhi → u/No-Revolution6743]

The problem with a product isn't about the idea being discussed or copied. It's about building a loyal user base that will actually use your product. That's the process of how the community gets built.

At its core, a product is basically about solving a need. Once that need is solved, customers usually stick with the product, even when cheaper alternatives pop up.

That's because switching products usually comes with a cost. For a game, you lose all your in-game items or saves. For software, your day to day workflow relies on it, so switching brings risk and friction. Unless you self-sabotage your product, that initial user base usually sticks around in my experience.

Once you have that, you have a real community, and it's pretty hard to pry those users away. Apple is one company that uses this tactic successfully to build a loyal fanbase.

For example, the only reason the Adobe suite gets copied by vibed code is because users have major complaints (like the subscription model) that never get addressed.

Otherwise, a mature product is really hard to replace. Even if someone vibe-coded a clone of iOS, they still couldn't replace it Apple built. If someone vibe coded steam, they are not going to replace Steam.

[u/not_food → u/softhi]

That kind of relationship will not be possible to replace with a vibe code game/app.

Huh? How so? Building a community is a matter of community management not programing.

[u/softhi → u/not_food]

Exactly. Which means you can't just vibe code your way through it. Like, you can possibly build a GTA clone in a month. But you can't build a community or trust instantly. It is going to take years.

I don't think a technical moat will exist for long. The differentiator between software and game companies will be how responsively they handle user feedback or simply not abandoning the project.

I also think game studios will pivot toward hosting massive live events. Creating that shared feeling of thousands of real players logging on together at the exact same time. That's another thing solo creators or quick clones simply won't be able to replicate.

That's why I say game devs will adapt. I just spent 10 minutes thinking about this and already came up with a few ways games can differentiate themselves beyond pure mechanics or code. I'm sure actual studios will figure out plenty more.

[u/not_food → u/softhi]

AI GTA clone? Ananta seems to be building the community just fine and they use AI for a lot of things.

Apples to oranges. Marketing and community management are separate from coding and design. The tool can't do them because that's not what it's for, but that says nothing about what you can do.

[u/softhi → u/not_food]

I’m not saying they can’t build a community. I’m asking what existing game developers can adopt to make their products unique and difficult to replicate. Therefore, it is not a big deal for many game dev.

Or do you believe traditional game studio have no chance of surviving?

[u/throwaway_pls123123 → u/not_food]

People keep thinking using AI means you just press a button and after some magic, ONLY the AI can work on the project.

In reality it is just there to accelerate things.

[u/not_food → u/throwaway_pls123123]

Precisely, it's just another tool.